Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Hypothetically speaking, if assault weapons are banned what liberties will you be losing?

page: 7
9
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Afterthought
 




To answer your question in more depth, if my gun is taken away, I will no longer be able to defend my body or my property from intruders. The government cannot protect me from people like this and should not be allowed to take away my right to protect myself and my home.


Who is coming to take your gun? None of the proposed laws have any aspect even close to gun confiscation. You can still purchase guns, ammo, and accessories, you can still protect yourself.

You aren't allowed to have an RPG, are you upset about that? You aren't allowed to have a surface to air missile, are you upset over that?

Think logically. Your country is crumbling, the economy is a joke, and your government can't even properly perform a census, yet you think it's within their ability to confiscate guns from every American?

Some sanity needs to come into play here, your government is not 1 gun law away from tyranny, take a break from the intertubes for awhile and find some balance in your life.




posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


How many of your gun-toting acquaintances are ready to take up arms to defend an illicit drug user's right to get high? Would you say your attitude was shared by most gun rights advocates?



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainBeno
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 

Hahahaha we used to just catch them and break their necks?
Next it will be handgrenades?

Let's leave fishing for another thread, eh?



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


It's an increasing number thanks to people like Ron Paul.

60% of Young Americans plan to buy firearms

It goes hand in hand with getting the government out of marriage, ending the pointless war on drugs, ending a global military presence, etc...

It's about liberty for a growing number of people young and old.

My personal aquaintances all feel the same way. They range from their 20's up into their 70's.

Your rights are my rights. My rights are your rights. Let's protect them together.

ETA: I understand the stereotypes you're trying to work with here. The old fat racist white guy who hates hippies. Oddly enough, that type of gun owner is the type that will get on board with an assault weapons ban or a magazine capacity law because that old fat racist white guy fears the "bad people" who could get one.

In effect, your greatest ally in a fight for prohibition is the very stereotypical gun owner you dislike so much.

The same type of guy who will support a breed ban. Not on his German shepherd but on those "evil" terriers simply because he sees black people on TV who have them.
edit on 17-1-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


You really think they're going to stop with assault rifles? Why do you think they're getting doctors involved? If a gun owner tells their doctor that they're feeling depressed, should this person be worried that the doctor is going to report that they believe their gun should be taken away because they may harm themselves? Please wake up and smell the coffee. They have only just started with assault weapons to build a solid foundation for their total gun grab.

If you haven't visited this thread by ModernAcademia and watched the short video, I highly recommend it.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 08:18 AM
link   


Hypothetically speaking, if assault weapons are banned what liberties will you be losing?


The useful and practical ability to form a citizens' militia (with arms designed for the task)
and repel tyranny in our government, or repel invading forces of UN soldiers.

Is that simple enough for you?

It's the reason theses words are so plain and simple....

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by greenfox83
Well for one, no more fresh duck or deer meat at my house. This will take away my husbands freedom to go in the woods and hunt for food for his family.


My granddad was an avid hunter (and famous in his town). There was always fresh meat in the house. I doubt that any of the fine weapons he employed would fall into the "assault" category. I don't see your point.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by rival



Hypothetically speaking, if assault weapons are banned what liberties will you be losing?


The useful and practical ability to form a citizens' militia (with arms designed for the task)
and repel tyranny in our government, or repel invading forces of UN soldiers.

Is that simple enough for you?


It is simple indeed! "invading UN soldiers" == "serious paranoia".



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 

Be honest, it's more about maintaining the illusion of liberty than it is about the act of owning a gun being any insurance against tyranny. It took until the latter part of the 20th century for your nation to even acknowledge non-whites as being equals, so this nonsense about you being all for liberty is a joke.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


So that's your best response? Call me a liar and ignore everything I've said?

No wonder the world is in such a state.

I like how you pin the entire timeline of slavery and Jim Crow on me. That's great. Didnt know I had that much power. Especially not before I was born. I must be incredible!
edit on 17-1-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


It's an increasing number thanks to people like Ron Paul.

60% of Young Americans plan to buy firearms



That headline is slightly misleading. From the actual article and poll.


According to the study, about 40 percent of the American students surveyed said they definitely planned to own firearms once they had established their own households. Another 20 percent said they were “contemplating” owning guns.


Not picking a fight, just showing how it's not strictly accurate.

And don't get me started on what 'about 40%' actually could mean.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by khimbar
 


Just using the title from the article.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by khimbar
 


Just using the title from the article.


I know. And it's not accurate.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainBeno

Because in Australia there is absolutely no need for one? At all?

I have never ever encountered a situation where I have needed to kill anyone?
I have never had a break-in that involved violence?
No one I know has a gun?
I have never heard of any shootings in my area / State?

Have you ever visited another country?

You can't take your gun!

What would you do? Is that the reason most American don't travel to other countries? because they feel scared without there weapons?

S* only happens in your country! You need to change that first, then the gun laws.


You heard it here first folks. Violent crime has been completely eradicated in Australia!



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptainBeno
 


Do you notice how your the only one with off topics posts? You are not debating you at making statements that are general and are obviously biased.

Using Australia as the ultimate example of Utopian society is not a legitimate argument. Just as you claim everything isn't about the US, same with Australia. We will never be culturally similar in some respects. Not to mention we have about 250 million more people.

I'm a gun owner and I don't agree with any executive orders. PERIOD.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


So that's your best response? Call me a liar and ignore everything I've said?

No wonder the world is in such a state.

I like how you pin the entire timeline of slavery and Jim Crow on me. That's great. Didnt know I had that much power. Especially not before I was born. I must be incredible!
edit on 17-1-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)

I didn't call you a liar, I asked for honesty in your next post when addressing the point that having a gun was more about maintaining an illusion of liberty, than it was about being the reason you had this magical state of being. A gun in the hands of an idiot is a gun in the hands of an idiot - it doesn't guarantee said idiot life, liberty and the pursuit of the American Dream.
edit on 17-1-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by zayonara
"The right to bear arms" does not read "The right to bear arms that your government says you can bear." Simple as that. No more, no less, no foaming.
edit on 16-1-2013 by zayonara because: (no reason given)


Should you be allowed access to WMDs if you can get them, or is it not as simple as you are making out?

What about RPGs?
edit on 17-1-2013 by humphreysjim because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by rival



Hypothetically speaking, if assault weapons are banned what liberties will you be losing?


The useful and practical ability to form a citizens' militia (with arms designed for the task)
and repel tyranny in our government, or repel invading forces of UN soldiers.

Is that simple enough for you?


It is simple indeed! "invading UN soldiers" == "serious paranoia".


No, it is a "serious" education in human history, and a clear understanding of human nature.

What is .simple is that I would rather be paranoid (and alive) than naive (and dead).

I just wish more people had paid attention during history class...then there would be no need
for discussion.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


I never said having a gun secured my liberty.

I said I oppose all prohibitions.

As such having a gun, any gun I so choose, is a lack of prohibitions.

Having an ounce of weed doesnt grant you liberty. If you have liberty no one is telling you you cant have that ounce of weed.



posted on Jan, 17 2013 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by humphreysjim

Originally posted by zayonara
"The right to bear arms" does not read "The right to bear arms that your government says you can bear." Simple as that. No more, no less, no foaming.
edit on 16-1-2013 by zayonara because: (no reason given)


Should you be allowed access to WMDs if you can get them, or is it not as simple as you are making out?

What about RPGs?
edit on 17-1-2013 by humphreysjim because: (no reason given)


You can on both accounts. The only thing preventing you from acquiring them is money.

The whole "OMG everyone will have nukes!" thing is a dead end position.






top topics



 
9
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join